No more demolition of heritage buildings, abandoned or neglected by their owners? Despite the recent legislative changes put in place to tackle this phenomenon in Quebec, the ability of municipalities to adequately protect their existing built environment remains limited. State of play.
In recent decades, many churches, century-old homes and other heritage buildings have fallen under the peak of demolishers in the province, having been left vacant or poorly maintained by their owners, voluntarily or not. So much so that the Government of Quebec took the bull by the horns by sanctioning, on 1er April 2021, its Bill 69, which became the Act to amend the Cultural Heritage Act and other legislative provisions.
Under this piece of legislation, cities in Quebec had until 1er April of this year to adopt a regulation governing the demolition of buildings and until 1er April 2026 to adopt a regulation on the occupation and maintenance of heritage buildings on their territory, with the aim of ensuring their preservation.
At present, some cities have not yet adopted a demolition by-law, despite the deadline imposed by the Legault government, reports the president of the Fédération Histoire Québec, Jean-Louis Vallée. The Ministry of Culture and Communications as well as that of Municipal Affairs could not confirm this information. Certainly, other cities, such as Quebec and Montreal, have adopted in recent months regulatory changes concerning the occupation and maintenance of their buildings that go further than the requirements set out in the legislative document resulting from Bill 69. These two cities thus intend to oblige the owners of heritage buildings to keep them in good condition, under penalty of receiving a fine of up to $250,000.
The regional county municipalities (RCM) also have until 2026 to draw up an inventory of all their buildings built before 1940 and which are of heritage interest. The City of Montreal also intends to carry out a similar inventory, which should help it supervise the maintenance of heritage buildings in the city. “It will be a very interesting tool to be able to have targeted, surgical actions”, explains the head of urban planning on the executive committee, Robert Beaudry.
The ability of cities to adequately inspect all heritage buildings on their territory, then to force the hand of recalcitrant owners, remains limited, however, note several heritage defenders joined by The duty. “It is clear that, in the application of these regulations, there are technical challenges which mean that there will still be losses of heritage buildings”, says in particular the lawyer and doctoral student at Laval University Charles Breton-Demeule, who has carried out several research projects relating to the protection of Quebec heritage.
Limited powers
Moreover, municipalities do not yet have the power to force an owner to carry out repair work on a building with heritage value at his own expense. They must therefore fight in court against recalcitrant owners to obtain authorization to carry out this work themselves, before sending the invoice to the owner, hoping that he will agree to pay it.
However, “if each time it is necessary to continue [les propriétaires récalcitrants], it creates a backlog of legal structures and procedures which means that many buildings will have time to disappear before things are done,” says the director of policies at Héritage Montréal, Dinu Bumbaru. According to him, Quebec would do well to take inspiration from the Netherlands by proposing an exemption from property taxes for buildings classified as heritage, in exchange for which the owners of these would undertake to properly maintain these buildings, which would be subject to regular inspections.
“There’s a stick, but would that take a carrot too?” asks Mélissa Coulombe-Leduc, responsible for heritage and urban planning on the executive committee of the City of Quebec. The latter believes that collective reflection is needed to find ways to further encourage owners to properly maintain heritage buildings, of which there are between 15,000 and 20,000 in Quebec City.
Have the means to expropriate
The new Quebec legislation also allows cities to register a notice in the land register when an owner refuses to carry out certain corrective work on a building. If, within 60 days, the required work has not been done, a City may proceed with the acquisition of the building concerned, either by expropriation or by mutual agreement, whether or not it presents a security problem.
The problem is that municipalities lack the financial means to carry out such expropriations, notes elected municipal official Robert Beaudry. “Cities don’t just have to have the capacity to do it [d’exproprier des propriétaires], but also that they have the means”, he argues. “The tools we have must always come with the financial means. »
Gérard Beaudet, professor at the School of Urban Planning and Landscape Architecture at the University of Montreal, believes that cities can contribute to the protection of heritage buildings by taking them more into account in their urban planning regulations. Municipalities could, for example, make sure that they do not authorize high-rise buildings in sectors where heritage buildings are located in order to prevent them from bearing the brunt of increased real estate pressure in the name of greater density.
“Municipalities are partly to blame for the pressures on the built environment. When we allow what is disproportionate to what exists, we condemn what exists to disappear,” explains Mr. Beaudet. “Are we being obsessed with densification, are we going to start allowing radical transformations of neighborhoods that will have negative impacts on heritage? ” he asks.
In this regard, Robert Beaudry believes that a balance must be found between densification and heritage protection. “We have to find ways because we want it, densification; we need it for social and ecological reasons, but it must be done in an intensification that is consistent with the urban form of Montreal,” he notes. “It must take into account the heritage aspects. »